Iris Pro Graphics 5200 vs GeForce 940M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 940M with Iris Pro Graphics 5200, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 940M
2015
2 GB DDR3, 75 Watt
2.92
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
2013
System shared System shared + 128 MB eDRAM, 45 Watt
3.07
+5.1%

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 outperforms 940M by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking779758
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.327.31
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 7.5 (2013)
GPU code nameGM108Haswell GT3e
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)27 May 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384320
Core clock speed1072 MHz200 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate28.2248.00
Floating-point processing power0.9032 TFLOPS0.768 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs2440

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3System shared + 128 MB eDRAM
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.3
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 940M 2.92
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 3.07
+5.1%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 940M 1125
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1184
+5.2%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce 940M 2406
+25.1%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1923

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce 940M 7531
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 8692
+15.4%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GeForce 940M 1622
+17.5%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1381

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce 940M 8819
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 11930
+35.3%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce 940M 123311
+12%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 110085

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD18
+0%
18
+0%
4K13
+62.5%
8
−62.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 15
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+156%
16−18
−156%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21
+75%
12−14
−75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+113%
16−18
−113%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+26.3%
19
−26.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−133%
14−16
+133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GeForce 940M and Iris Pro Graphics 5200 compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • GeForce 940M is 63% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce 940M is 200% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 133% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce 940M is ahead in 12 tests (20%)
  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is ahead in 7 tests (11%)
  • there's a draw in 42 tests (69%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.92 3.07
Recency 13 March 2015 27 May 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 45 Watt

GeForce 940M has an age advantage of 1 year.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200, on the other hand, has a 5.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce 940M and Iris Pro Graphics 5200.

Be aware that GeForce 940M is a notebook card while Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 940M
GeForce 940M
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Iris Pro Graphics 5200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 665 votes

Rate GeForce 940M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 162 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.